4.  The applicant was born in 1954 and lives in Dublin. He was a teacher at a school in Dublin in the 1980s.
5.  In July 1998 the applicant was charged with sexual offences in 1982 as regards A, B, C, D and E (minors and students in the school).
6.  On 5 October 1998 he was returned for trial. The trial was due to commence in February 1999 but it was adjourned (the applicant’s request) due to publicity surrounding the trial. The trial was re-listed for 15 November 1999: on that date the indictment was severed (the applicant’s request) so that separate consecutive trials would take place as regards each complainant.
7.  On 15 November 1999 the trial proceeded on the charges raised by A. The applicant was acquitted nine days later.
8.  On 24 January 2000 the trial on charges concerning B began. The jury was dismissed and the trial was reset for 22 May 2000.
9.  On 22 March 2000 the applicant was tried and convicted of 2 counts of sexual assault of C and sentenced to four years’ imprisonment.
10.  On 22 May 2000 the trial concerning B recommenced. He was acquitted of a charge of rape but convicted on five counts of sexual assault. He was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment (one year of which was suspended), which sentence was to run concurrently with the sentence in respect of C. During the trial the applicant had unsuccessfully applied to stay the indictment on grounds of delay; on 22 May 2000 he was accorded leave to appeal the refusal of the stay; on 27 January 2003 the Court of Criminal Appeal (“CCA”) dismissed his appeal; in March 2003 the CCA granted the applicant leave to appeal on a point of law of exceptional public importance to the Supreme Court (section 24 of the Courts of Justice Act 1924); on 15 June 2006 the Supreme Court heard the appeal; and on 27 July 2006 judgment, dismissing the appeal, was delivered.
11.  On 26 June 2001 the trial on the charges concerning D began. The indictment was quashed on grounds of delay (the applicant’s application).
12.  E was 12 years of age at the time of the alleged offences in 1982. She complained to the police in June 1998. On 15 July 1998 the applicant was charged with indecent assault contrary to the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981. As noted above, on 5 October 1998 he was returned for trial on all charges (students A-E) and the trial was adjourned to 15 November 1999, on which date the indictments were severed.
13.  The trial concerning E was listed for 10 June 2002. However, since no judge was available, it was re-listed for 12 January 2004.
14.  On 6 May 2003 the applicant was released from prison (sentence following conviction on offences against C).
15.  On 7 July 2003 the applicant applied on an ex parte basis to the High Court for, and was granted, leave to apply by way of judicial review to prohibit the proceedings on grounds of delay since the alleged offence as well as for a stay on those proceedings pending the prohibition action. On 10 February 2004 a statement of opposition was delivered.
16.  On 11 March 2005 the High Court ruled (detailed judgment) that the delay in pursuing the charges was such that his applicant’s ability to defend the charges had probably been prejudiced so that there was a risk of an unfair trial and it prohibited the applicant’s prosecution.
17.  In April 2005 the prosecution appealed to the Supreme Court. The appeal was adjourned on a number of occasions, although the dates and reasons are not clear. On 20 December 2007 the Supreme Court heard the appeal. On 4 March 2008 judgment was delivered allowing the appeal (the court not being satisfied that there was a real or serious risk of an unfair trial) so that the prosecution could proceed.
18.  On 20 October 2008 the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of indecent assault of E. On 9 February 2009 he was sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment. He appealed against sentence arguing that that sentence amounted to a consecutive sentence whereas concurrent sentences were the practice where offences were committed against several victims. On 5 November 2009 the CCA rejected his argument, but suspended the last 12 months of his sentence subject to probation and therapy.
19.  The applicant was released from prison in July 2010.